list_documents

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that it lists open documents but does not mention return format (e.g., names, IDs, paths), ordering, or any side effects. This is minimal and leaves the agent guessing about the response structure.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, efficient sentence with no filler. It front-loads the action and scope, and every word earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate but not complete. It does not specify what information the list will contain (names, IDs, etc.), which could be important for an agent to decide if it should use a different tool like get_document_info. Since the siblings vary widely, a bit more detail on the return format would improve completeness.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool has zero parameters, so the schema coverage is technically 100% (vacuously). Per the rubric, a tool with 0 parameters receives a baseline score of 4. The description adds no parameter info, but that is not needed here.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a clear verb ('Lists') and a specific resource ('all InDesign documents currently open'). It distinguishes this from sibling tools like get_document_info (which targets a specific document) and export tools, making the purpose immediately obvious.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The phrase 'currently open' provides clear context for when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternative tools such as get_document_info for specifics. For a simple list operation, the usage is well implied, so a 4 is appropriate.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.